do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Call for proposals under the multiannual work programme for financial assistance in the field of Connecting Europe Facility (CEF) — Transport sector for the period 2014-2020 (Commission Implementing Decision C(2017) 5437 amending Implementing Decision C(2014) 1921)
Date: 2017-10-06
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU aid, EU financial instrument, EU programme, air traffic control, financial aid, invitation to tender, trans-European network, transport network








C_2017334EN.01000201.xml










6.10.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 334/2





Call for proposals under the multiannual work programme for financial assistance in the field of Connecting Europe Facility (CEF) — Transport sector for the period 2014-2020

(Commission Implementing Decision C(2017) 5437
 (1)
amending Implementing Decision C(2014) 1921
 (2)
)

(2017/C 334/02)
The European Commission, Directorate-General for Mobility and Transport, is hereby launching a call for proposals in order to award grants in accordance with the priorities and objectives defined in the multiannual work programme for financial assistance in the field of Connecting Europe Facility (CEF) — Transport sector (General envelope).
This call for proposals addresses the priority Single European Sky — SESAR, with an indicative budget of EUR 290 million.
The deadline for the submission of proposals is 15 March 2018.
The complete texts of the calls for proposals are available on:
https://ec.europa.eu/inea/en/connecting-europe-facility/cef-transport/apply-funding/2017-cef-transport-calls-proposals


(1)  Commission Implementing Decision C(2017) 5437 final of 3 August 2017 amending Implementing Decision C(2014) 1921 establishing a Multi-Annual Work Programme 2014-2020 for financial assistance in the field of Connecting Europe Facility (CEF) — Transport sector for the period 2014-2020.

(2)  Commission Implementing Decision C(2014) 1921 final of 26 March 2014 establishing a Multi-Annual Work Programme 2014 for financial assistance in the field of Connecting Europe Facility (CEF) — Transport sector for the period 2014-2020.
Case T-184/16: Judgment of the General Court of 6 October 2017 — NRJ Group v EUIPO — Sky International (SKY ENERGY) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for the EU word mark SKY ENERGY — Earlier EU word mark NRJ — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
Date: 2017-10-06
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, broadcasting, programmes industry, registered trade mark, telecommunications, trade-mark law








C_2017402EN.01002402.xml










27.11.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 402/24





Judgment of the General Court of 6 October 2017 — NRJ Group v EUIPO — Sky International (SKY ENERGY)
(Case T-184/16) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU word mark SKY ENERGY - Earlier EU word mark NRJ - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))
(2017/C 402/31)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: NRJ Group (Boileau, France) (represented by: M. Antoine-Lalance, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: H. O’Neill, Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Sky International AG (Zug, Switzerland) (represented by: J. Barry, Solicitor)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 5 February 2016 (Case R 3137/2014-5), relating to opposition proceedings between NRJ Group and Sky International.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders NRJ Group to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 232, 27.6.2016.
Case C-586/17: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Raad van State (Netherlands) lodged on 6 October 2017 — Staatssecretaris van Veiligheid en Justitie, I., D.
Date: 2017-10-06
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: administrative court, administrative procedure, foreign national, right of asylum, right to justice








C_2018005EN.01002101.xml










8.1.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 5/21





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Raad van State (Netherlands) lodged on 6 October 2017 — Staatssecretaris van Veiligheid en Justitie, I., D.
(Case C-586/17)
(2018/C 005/28)
Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Raad van State

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellants: Staatssecretaris van Veiligheid en Justitie, I.

Other party: D.

Questions referred







1.








(a)


Does Article 46(3) of Directive 2013/32/EU (1) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on common procedures for granting and withdrawing international protection (recast) …, read in conjunction with Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, preclude a system under which the administrative court of first instance in asylum cases may not, in principle, take into account a ground for asylum first put forward by a foreign national in the judicial proceedings before it when assessing that action?










(b)


Does it matter in this regard whether a de facto new ground for asylum is put forward, that is to say, a ground for applying for international protection based on facts and circumstances which arose after the decision of the determining authority on the application for international protection, or whether it is a ground for asylum which was initially withheld, that is to say, a ground for applying for international protection which is based on facts and circumstances which arose before the decision of the determining authority on the application for international protection and which the foreign national knew about but was at fault for not disclosing in the administrative phase?










(c)


Does it matter in this regard whether the ground for asylum is put forward in the framework of judicial proceedings before the administrative court of first instance in asylum cases challenging a decision of the determining authority on a first application or on a subsequent application for international protection?














2.


If Question 1(a) is answered in the affirmative, does EU law then also preclude an administrative court of first instance in asylum cases from choosing to refer the examination of a ground for asylum first put forward in the judicial proceedings before it for a fresh procedure before the determining authority, in order thereby to safeguard the due process of law in the judicial proceedings or to prevent those proceedings from being unduly delayed?






(1)  OJ 2013 L 180, p. 60.
Case T-176/16: Judgment of the General Court of 6 October 2017 — Kofola ČeskoSlovensko v EUIPO — Mionetto (UGO) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU figurative mark UGO — Earlier EU figurative mark il UGO! — Partial surrender of the earlier mark — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
Date: 2017-10-06
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, fruit juice, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2017392EN.01002301.xml










20.11.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 392/23





Judgment of the General Court of 6 October 2017 — Kofola ČeskoSlovensko v EUIPO — Mionetto (UGO)
(Case T-176/16) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark UGO - Earlier EU figurative mark il UGO! - Partial surrender of the earlier mark - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))
(2017/C 392/28)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Kofola ČeskoSlovensko a.s (Ostrava, Czech Republic) (represented by: L. Lorenc, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: M. Rajh, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Mionetto SpA (Valdobbiadne, Italy)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 22 February 2016 (Case R 2707/2014-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Mionetto and Kofola ČeskoSlovensko.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Kofola ČeskoSlovensko a.s. to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 222, 20.6.2016.
Case T-386/16: Judgment of the General Court of 6 October 2017 — Falegnameria Universo dei F.lli Priarollo v EUIPO — Zanini Porte (silente PORTE & PORTE) (EU trade mark — Revocation proceedings — EU figurative mark silente PORTE & PORTE — Genuine use — Place of use — Nature of use — Use by third parties — Declaration of revocation — Right of defence — Articles 75 and 76 of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Article 51(1)(a) of Regulation No 207/2009)
Date: 2017-10-06
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, electronic device, furniture industry, metal furniture, registered trade mark, trade-mark law








C_2017402EN.01002901.xml










27.11.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 402/29





Judgment of the General Court of 6 October 2017 — Falegnameria Universo dei F.lli Priarollo v EUIPO — Zanini Porte (silente PORTE & PORTE)
(Case T-386/16) (1)

((EU trade mark - Revocation proceedings - EU figurative mark silente PORTE & PORTE - Genuine use - Place of use - Nature of use - Use by third parties - Declaration of revocation - Right of defence - Articles 75 and 76 of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Article 51(1)(a) of Regulation No 207/2009))
(2017/C 402/37)
Language of the case: Italian

Parties


Applicant: Falegnameria Universo dei F.lli Priarollo Snc (Caerano di San Marco, Italy) (represented by: B. Osti, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: S. Di Natale and L. Rampini, Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Zanini Porte SpA (Bosco Chiesanuova, Italy) (represented by: A. Rizzoli, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 28 April 2016 (Case R 240/2015-1) concerning revocation proceedings between Zanini Porte and Falegnameria Universo dei F.lli Priarollo.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Falegnameria Universo dei F.lli Priarollo to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 383, 17.10.2016.
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2017-10-06
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, money








C_2017334EN.01000101.xml










6.10.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 334/1





Euro exchange rates (1)

5 October 2017
(2017/C 334/01)

1 euro =











 


Currency


Exchange rate




USD


US dollar


1,1742 




JPY


Japanese yen


132,05 




DKK


Danish krone


7,4424 




GBP


Pound sterling


0,89153 




SEK


Swedish krona


9,5195 




CHF


Swiss franc


1,1472 




ISK


Iceland króna


 




NOK


Norwegian krone


9,3500 




BGN


Bulgarian lev


1,9558 




CZK


Czech koruna


25,837 




HUF


Hungarian forint


311,42 




PLN


Polish zloty


4,3000 




RON


Romanian leu


4,5750 




TRY


Turkish lira


4,1905 




AUD


Australian dollar


1,5015 




CAD


Canadian dollar


1,4655 




HKD


Hong Kong dollar


9,1701 




NZD


New Zealand dollar


1,6413 




SGD


Singapore dollar


1,5998 




KRW


South Korean won


1 337,65 




ZAR


South African rand


16,0020 




CNY


Chinese yuan renminbi


7,8108 




HRK


Croatian kuna


7,5055 




IDR


Indonesian rupiah


15 803,15 




MYR


Malaysian ringgit


4,9651 




PHP


Philippine peso


59,949 




RUB


Russian rouble


67,5273 




THB


Thai baht


39,160 




BRL


Brazilian real


3,6772 




MXN


Mexican peso


21,4107 




INR


Indian rupee


76,4965 






(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
Case T-878/16: Judgment of the General Court of 6 October 2017 — Karelia v EUIPO (KARELIA) (EU trade mark — Application for the EU word mark ‘KARELIA’ — Absolute ground for refusal — Descriptive character — No distinctive character — Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
Date: 2017-10-06
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, fuel, industrial fat, medical device, registered trade mark, rubber industry, trade-mark law








C_2017402EN.01003202.xml










27.11.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 402/32





Judgment of the General Court of 6 October 2017 — Karelia v EUIPO (KARELIA)
(Case T-878/16) (1)

((EU trade mark - Application for the EU word mark ‘KARELIA’ - Absolute ground for refusal - Descriptive character - No distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))
(2017/C 402/42)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Ino Karelia (Kalamata, Greece) (represented by: M. Karpathakis, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: L. Rampini, Agent)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 19 September 2016 (Case R 1562/2015-5), relating to an application for registration of the word sign ‘KARELIA’ as an EU trade mark

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Ms Ino Karelia to pay the costs.






(1)  OJ C 38, 6.2.2017.
Case T-139/16: Judgment of the General Court of 6 October 2017 — SDSR v EUIPO — Berghaus (BERG OUTDOOR) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — International registration designating the European Union — Figurative mark BERG OUTDOOR — Earlier EU word marks BERGHAUS — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Similarity of signs — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
Date: 2017-10-06
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU trade mark, clothing, footwear industry, leather, registered trade mark, sports equipment, trade-mark law








C_2017392EN.01002102.xml










20.11.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 392/21





Judgment of the General Court of 6 October 2017 — SDSR v EUIPO — Berghaus (BERG OUTDOOR)
(Case T-139/16) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - International registration designating the European Union - Figurative mark BERG OUTDOOR - Earlier EU word marks BERGHAUS - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Similarity of signs - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))
(2017/C 392/26)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Sports Division SR, SA (SDSR) (Matosinhos, Portugal) (represented by A. Sebastião and J. Pimenta, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by J. Ivanauskas, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Berghaus Ltd (London, United Kingdom) (represented by S. Ashby, A. Carboni and J. Colbourn, Solicitors)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 21 January 2016 (Case R 153/2015-2) relating to opposition proceedings between Berghaus and SDSR.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:






1.


Dismisses the action;










2.


Orders Sports Division SR, SA (SDSR) to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by EUIPO and the intervener.






(1)  OJ C 175, 17.5.2016.